From: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org (fegmaniax-digest) To: fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Subject: fegmaniax-digest V9 #244 Reply-To: fegmaniax@smoe.org Sender: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk fegmaniax-digest Thursday, August 31 2000 Volume 09 : Number 244 Today's Subjects: ----------------- Re: b-52s ["Stewart C. Russell" ] Re: a little something nicked from the onion ["Stewart C. Russell" ] Since the list is moribund and it's a slow day... (100% weenieism) [Eb ] Re: Language question... [Christopher Gross ] Re: Fwd: how very...Robyn [Miles Goosens ] Re: Since the list is moribund... [MARKEEFE@aol.com] Re: Language question... [Jonatan "Morén" ] Re: moribund scene & list [Eb ] RE: moribund (no burgermeister content) [Eb ] moribundity and Robyn live ["jbranscombe@compuserve.com" ] MongoMusic ["Tom Clark" ] Re: Language question... [Christopher Gross ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2000 11:46:06 +0100 From: "Stewart C. Russell" Subject: Re: b-52s "Andrew D. Simchik" wrote: > > "will be in the UK in the near future" unlikely; the last time they were here was 92, on the Good Stuff tour. > "have made live appearances within the last few months," Whee! Wonder if any new recorded material will come out? Stewart ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2000 11:48:02 +0100 From: "Stewart C. Russell" Subject: Re: a little something nicked from the onion Jeff Dwarf wrote: > > "... but in They Might Be > Giants' case, they're all 31-year-old computer programmers." 31, a programmer, and wearing a Severe Tire Damage Tour t-shirt; so sue me. Stewart ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 11:10:23 PDT From: "Natalie Jacobs" Subject: more napster stuff This is an interesting article... http://www.theatlantic.com/issues/2000/09/mann.htm n. "Ralph's got balls." - sign seen at Portland Nader rally _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 16:18:46 -0700 From: Eb Subject: Since the list is moribund and it's a slow day... (100% weenieism) ...I'll go out on a limb, and indulge myself. I suppose this is fueled by my recent discovery about Richard Thompson and Capitol, even though Thompson is more of an old-school name. In recent months, I've been on a peripheral quest to wearily chart the fall of "Alternative" music from the mainstream marketplace. Much to my dismay, what remains is mostly lunkheaded moshpit fodder and that shallow "grease pop" about which I've previously griped at ridiculous length. As far as I know, these are the only Eb-endorsed acts from the alternative boom, which are still on major labels: Chris Cornell, Spiritualized, Sinead O'Connor, Elastica, Meat Puppets, Mazzy Star, Liz Phair, Vic Chesnutt, Beulah, Midnight Oil (?), Teenage Fanclub, the Afghan Whigs, the Jayhawks (not for long, I bet), Mike Watt, Eels, Elliott Smith, Billy Bragg, Bjork, the Breeders (if they even exist?), Stereolab, Ween, Ben Folds Five, Oasis, Sonic Youth (simultaneously active as an indie act), the Sundays, Beck, Weezer, Butthole Surfers (uh...they're signed to Hollywood, right?), Nine Inch Nails, Plug (?), Primus, the Folk Implosion, PJ Harvey, Supergrass, Money Mark, Portishead, Foo Fighters, Chumbawamba, Firewater (or are they dropped already?), Cracker, Smashing Pumpkins/Billy Corgan, Blur, Placebo, Sean Lennon, Bis, Moby, Grandaddy, Ministry, the Flaming Lips and Cibo Matto. It's worth observing that Firewater, Beulah and the Folk Implosion are the only names signed during the last couple of years. (Note: There are a few other arguable candidates whom I can't bring myself to call "alternative," like Tori Amos, Jason Falkner and Rufus Wainwright.) This tallies exactly 50 acts. A pretty small number, considering what was happening five years ago. Now, there are another dozen favored artists on major labels whom I'd basically call "alternative" -- however, they're established veterans who substantially preceded the '90s explosion. Specifically, I'm talking about David Bowie, Lou Reed, Iggy Pop, Peter Gabriel, Bryan Ferry, Patti Smith, John Lydon, David Byrne, Kate Bush, Elvis Costello, David Sylvian, Laurie Anderson (recently dropped from a major label to a major-*distributed* label) and R.E.M. I don't really count them here, because their futures were secure long before "Alternative" became a coveted marketing term. On the other hand, here's a gruesome list of active, Eb-endorsed names who have left major labels, been dropped or lost major-label distribution: XTC, Shane MacGowan, Nick Cave, the Muffs, Mudhoney, Tanya Donelly, Luna, the High Llamas, Tom Waits, Frank Black, Mouse on Mars, They Might Be Giants, the Velvet Crush, Gorky's Zygotic Mynci, Super Furry Animals, Matthew Sweet, Hole, Bob Mould, Snowpony, Swell, Buffalo Tom, Sebadoh, Kristin Hersh, Bruce Gilbert, the Sugarplastic, Juliana Hatfield (though I still can't figure out why Island's logo appears on her new albums), Einsturzende Neubauten, Soul Asylum, Rocket From the Crypt, Robyn Hitchcock, Shonen Knife, Cowboy Junkies, Polara, Richard Thompson, Mary Lou Lord, World Party, Amnesia, Paul Westerberg, Beth Orton (I bet she'll get a new deal, though), the Cranes, Jane Siberry, Laika, Pizzicato Five, Swervedriver, the Geraldine Fibbers, Tricky, Mark Eitzel, Buzzcocks, Bettie Serveert, L7, Pavement, J Mascis, the Blue Nile, Pere Ubu, Daniel Johnston, the Chills, Brian Eno, Praxis, Screaming Trees, the Fall, Material, Squeeze, Adrian Belew, Kirsty MacColl, Jesus Jones, King Missile, Foetus, John Zorn, the Grassy Knoll, Poi Dog Pondering, 10000 Maniacs, the Wrens, Public Enemy, Thelonious Monster, Yo La Tengo, Gavin Friday, Milla, Danielle Dax, Gang of Four, Diamanda Galas, P.M. Dawn, the Blue Aeroplanes, Marianne Faithfull. *Whew*. Now, certainly, there are some other major-label alternative acts who have earned "objective" respect and credibility, like, say, Wilco, Radiohead, Modest Mouse, Built to Spill and Mercury Rev. The latter three are especially worth noting, since these are acts with no potential for mass success. So, I cheer these acts' stature, even if I don't personally warm up to their music. I'm probably neglecting a few other examples in this category. The Beastie Boys certainly deserve a nod, as long as you don't mind labeling them "alternative" rather than "rap." Anyway, so is it just a case of me being a hopeless fuddy-duddy when it comes to certain techno-, punk- and/or thrash-oriented acts, or is the overall situation really so grim? And feel free to correct any errors I've made about a given act's major/indie standing. Eb, cuttin' and pastin' from his notes np: the 222th crummy new release I've heard this year ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2000 06:26:55 -0700 From: mrrunion@palmnet.net Subject: RE: Since the list is moribund... - --- Original Message --- Eb Wrote on Wed, 30 Aug 2000 16:18:46 -0700 As far as I know, these are the only Eb-endorsed acts from the alternative boom, which are still on major labels: Chris Cornell, Spiritualized, Sinead O'Connor, Elastica, Meat Puppets, Mazzy Star, Liz Phair, Vic Chesnutt, - ------------------------ I'm not really up on what's considered a major label and what isn't, but Vic's new album "Merriment" was released on the incredibly small label Backburner, and I have no idea what sort of distribution this is getting. Is he still signed with Capricorn? Is Capricorn considered a major label? Was Texas Hotel? I was under the impression that Vic's only foree into major-labeldom was the Capital release of "About To Choke"...and didn't he leave the label after that one guy quit? Yeah, I don't think you're "hopeless fuddy-duddy"...at least not much. The music scene has definitely moved on, and I don't think the Alternative label means anything much these days, except maybe to date certain acts as 80's or early 90's. I've got two teenages in the house, and that music is certainly dated to them. Old fogey stuff. The cool stuff in my house seems to be those "thrash-oriented" acts like Slipknot. Urgh. Case in point: I was talking with my daughter's boyfriend, wanting him do to some drumming for me on a studio track. I told him I wanted hard but relatively calm drumming a la Dave Grohl. He laughed and said "God, Dave's drumming is so simple...that's where you start when you're learning to play drums". Something like that. I feel old. On a recent Sunday night when I wasn't working the next day, I stayed up late (woo-boy!) and wanted to catch 120 Minutes for old time's sake. It apparently doesn't exist anymore. I feel old. I think "alternative" is still alive and kicking on all the indie labels, and perhaps that's where it should be. Mike - ----- Sent using MailStart.com ( http://MailStart.Com/welcome.html ) The FREE way to access your mailbox via any web browser, anywhere! ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2000 14:59:49 BST From: "matt sewell" Subject: Re: Since the list is moribund and it's a slow day... (100% weenieism) Eb, I feel your pain... "alternative" music does seem to be dying a death, not just in the upper echelons of the music industry, but also at a local level. Here in Oxford, UK, venues are closing at a rate of knots - from between 5 and 10 venues where new and unsigned bands could play a few years ago to about 2 at present. I dunno whether it's entirely the fault of the music industry (although there's no doubt they're not doing anything to help), or whether it's as simple as the support for this kind of music dying out... Years ago in the UK there was a big independent music explosion (in the mid 80s), which continued well into the early nineties when indie music's head had reared far enough above the parapet to be spotted by big business, which then set about transforming "indie" into "alternative". Of the acts mentioned by Eb as being without label, I don't tend to worry about many of them as they're largely established, whether through record label promotion or otherwise - Robyn's a good example, in that he's now able to tour and release records and so forth and (presumably) turn a profit. It's all the new talent I worry about - how will they become established on the stony soil of the current music industry? Looks like tomorrow's rock'n'roll visionaries could end up being tomorrow's school caretakers (janitors to y'all in America)... My longest post ever, I think! BTW, seeing the reference to King Missile, are there any NY fegs planning to go to the John S Hall and King Missile III (Dog Fly Religion) shows? If so, I don't suppose you'd be taping them..? Cheers Matt >...I'll go out on a limb, and indulge myself. I suppose this is fueled by >my recent discovery about Richard Thompson and Capitol, even though >Thompson is more of an old-school name. > >In recent months, I've been on a peripheral quest to wearily chart the fall >of "Alternative" music from the mainstream marketplace. Much to my dismay, >what remains is mostly lunkheaded moshpit fodder and that shallow "grease >pop" about which I've previously griped at ridiculous length. > >As far as I know, these are the only Eb-endorsed acts from the alternative >boom, which are still on major labels: Chris Cornell, Spiritualized, Sinead >O'Connor, Elastica, Meat Puppets, Mazzy Star, Liz Phair, Vic Chesnutt, >Beulah, Midnight Oil (?), Teenage Fanclub, the Afghan Whigs, the Jayhawks >(not for long, I bet), Mike Watt, Eels, Elliott Smith, Billy Bragg, Bjork, >the Breeders (if they even exist?), Stereolab, Ween, Ben Folds Five, Oasis, >Sonic Youth (simultaneously active as an indie act), the Sundays, Beck, >Weezer, Butthole Surfers (uh...they're signed to Hollywood, right?), Nine >Inch Nails, Plug (?), Primus, the Folk Implosion, PJ Harvey, Supergrass, >Money Mark, Portishead, Foo Fighters, Chumbawamba, Firewater (or are they >dropped already?), Cracker, Smashing Pumpkins/Billy Corgan, Blur, Placebo, >Sean Lennon, Bis, Moby, Grandaddy, Ministry, the Flaming Lips and Cibo >Matto. It's worth observing that Firewater, Beulah and the Folk Implosion >are the only names signed during the last couple of years. (Note: There are >a few other arguable candidates whom I can't bring myself to call >"alternative," like Tori Amos, Jason Falkner and Rufus Wainwright.) > >This tallies exactly 50 acts. A pretty small number, considering what was >happening five years ago. Now, there are another dozen favored artists on >major labels whom I'd basically call "alternative" -- however, they're >established veterans who substantially preceded the '90s explosion. >Specifically, I'm talking about David Bowie, Lou Reed, Iggy Pop, Peter >Gabriel, Bryan Ferry, Patti Smith, John Lydon, David Byrne, Kate Bush, >Elvis Costello, David Sylvian, Laurie Anderson (recently dropped from a >major label to a major-*distributed* label) and R.E.M. I don't really count >them here, because their futures were secure long before "Alternative" >became a coveted marketing term. > >On the other hand, here's a gruesome list of active, Eb-endorsed names who >have left major labels, been dropped or lost major-label distribution: XTC, >Shane MacGowan, Nick Cave, the Muffs, Mudhoney, Tanya Donelly, Luna, the >High Llamas, Tom Waits, Frank Black, Mouse on Mars, They Might Be Giants, >the Velvet Crush, Gorky's Zygotic Mynci, Super Furry Animals, Matthew >Sweet, Hole, Bob Mould, Snowpony, Swell, Buffalo Tom, Sebadoh, Kristin >Hersh, Bruce Gilbert, the Sugarplastic, Juliana Hatfield (though I still >can't figure out why Island's logo appears on her new albums), Einsturzende >Neubauten, Soul Asylum, Rocket From the Crypt, Robyn Hitchcock, Shonen >Knife, Cowboy Junkies, Polara, Richard Thompson, Mary Lou Lord, World >Party, Amnesia, Paul Westerberg, Beth Orton (I bet she'll get a new deal, >though), the Cranes, Jane Siberry, Laika, Pizzicato Five, Swervedriver, the >Geraldine Fibbers, Tricky, Mark Eitzel, Buzzcocks, Bettie Serveert, L7, >Pavement, J Mascis, the Blue Nile, Pere Ubu, Daniel Johnston, the Chills, >Brian Eno, Praxis, Screaming Trees, the Fall, Material, Squeeze, Adrian >Belew, Kirsty MacColl, Jesus Jones, King Missile, Foetus, John Zorn, the >Grassy Knoll, Poi Dog Pondering, 10000 Maniacs, the Wrens, Public Enemy, >Thelonious Monster, Yo La Tengo, Gavin Friday, Milla, Danielle Dax, Gang of >Four, Diamanda Galas, P.M. Dawn, the Blue Aeroplanes, Marianne Faithfull. >*Whew*. > >Now, certainly, there are some other major-label alternative acts who have >earned "objective" respect and credibility, like, say, Wilco, Radiohead, >Modest Mouse, Built to Spill and Mercury Rev. The latter three are >especially worth noting, since these are acts with no potential for mass >success. So, I cheer these acts' stature, even if I don't personally warm >up to their music. I'm probably neglecting a few other examples in this >category. The Beastie Boys certainly deserve a nod, as long as you don't >mind labeling them "alternative" rather than "rap." > >Anyway, so is it just a case of me being a hopeless fuddy-duddy when it >comes to certain techno-, punk- and/or thrash-oriented acts, or is the >overall situation really so grim? And feel free to correct any errors I've >made about a given act's major/indie standing. > >Eb, cuttin' and pastin' from his notes > >np: the 222th crummy new release I've heard this year _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2000 15:06:33 BST From: "matt sewell" Subject: Language question... Fegs I've recently been hassled by a geezer over a review I wrote which contained the sentence "does everything this man touches turn to gold?" Now, I can't see anything wrong with that, but this man claims it should be "does everything this man touch turn to gold?" Who's right? Yours liguistically challenged, Matt _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2000 10:32:36 -0400 (EDT) From: Christopher Gross Subject: Re: Language question... On Thu, 31 Aug 2000, matt sewell wrote: > I've recently been hassled by a geezer over a review I wrote which contained > the sentence "does everything this man touches turn to gold?" > Now, I can't see anything wrong with that, but this man claims it should be > "does everything this man touch turn to gold?" > Who's right? You're right. He's so wrong, it's not even funny. In your sentence the subject of the verb "touches" is "man," which is singular, and "touches" is the correct third-person singular form of the verb. The geezer was probably thrown off by the word "does" at the beginning of the sentence, but the subject of "does" here is "everything," not "man," so it has no effect on the "touch." (Sorry if that explanation is unclear; if I was more awake I'd rewrite it, but I'm not, so I won't.) Yawningly, Chris ______________________________________________________________________ Christopher Gross On the Internet, nobody knows I'm a dog. chrisg@gwu.edu ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2000 09:32:31 -0500 From: Miles Goosens Subject: Re: Fwd: how very...Robyn At 10:03 AM 8/30/2000 -0700, John Barrington-Jones wrote: >> Police in Cairns in the far north of Queensland >> state said the 97-pound >> flowery cod was caught by a fishing trawler off >> Townsville Thus I suspect this is the handiwork of Mojo Jojo. later, Miles Utonium ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2000 11:39:00 EDT From: MARKEEFE@aol.com Subject: Re: Since the list is moribund... In a message dated 8/31/00 6:33:12 AM, mrrunion@palmnet.net writes: << I think "alternative" is still alive and kicking on all the indie labels, and perhaps that's where it should be. >> The term probably doesn't even need to have the quotation marks around it anymore. If it can only be found on indie lables, then it really *is* alternative, ain't it. As you said, that's where it should be (not even "perhaps," in my book). There were only about 2 years (1992+1993) where I enjoyed the mainstreaming of alternative music; after that, radio only played the really crap stuff, anyway ("And we're winding down yet another 12-song block party from Bush!"). This is our chance to take back the term "alternative" and have it mean something. Or come up with a new term. Or for there to be yet another explosion of cool music dominating the marketplace for a few years. Whatever comes around goes around. The music scene now is exactly as it was 10 years ago. Everyone will soon tire of N'Sync and Brittney, just as they did New Kids and Debbie Gibson back then. Fear not! The revolution will be televised, instantly syndicated, beaten like a dead horse, recycled, and then thrown away once again. And does it all really matter? Every year, I manage to find new CDs to buy and love. Whether or not I judge a year as a good year never has anything to do with the overall climate of the music scene that year, so what do I really care? Sure, I wouldn't mind another 1983 or 1992 where I enjoyed listening to the radio, but whatever. I just find the whole cycle of transformations interesting to observe. - -----Michael K. ------------------------------ Date: 31 Aug 2000 18:07:30 -0000 From: Jonatan "Morén" Subject: Re: Language question... Quoting Christopher Gross : > On Thu, 31 Aug 2000, matt sewell wrote: > > > I've recently been hassled by a geezer over a review I wrote which > contained > > the sentence "does everything this man touches turn to gold?" > > Now, I can't see anything wrong with that, but this man claims it should > be > > "does everything this man touch turn to gold?" > > Who's right? > > You're right. He's so wrong, it's not even funny. In your sentence the > subject of the verb "touches" is "man," which is singular, and "touches" > is the correct third-person singular form of the verb. The geezer was > probably thrown off by the word "does" at the beginning of the sentence, > but the subject of "does" here is "everything," not "man," so it has no > effect on the "touch." (Sorry if that explanation is unclear; if I was > more awake I'd rewrite it, but I'm not, so I won't.) > > Yawningly, > > Chris I don't think this is the geezer's point. I think he's getting at..is it called subjunctive in English grammar? You know, "he asked that everything he touch (hypothetical case) be turned to gold". Loads of it in..well, Shakespeare and King James' Bible I guess. I'm not sure anyone of you is wrong. But hey, I'm Swedish for chrissakes. J.M. ................................................................ 75.000 svenskar har nu gratis e-post pĺ Sverige.nu! http://www.sverige.nu ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2000 13:57:15 -0700 From: Eb Subject: Re: moribund scene & list Matt Sewell: >Here in Oxford, UK, venues are closing at a rate of knots - from between 5 >and 10 venues where new and unsigned bands could play a few years ago to >about 2 at present. Interesting. It doesn't seem like there have been many such casualties in L.A. in recent years, except for the (somewhat minor) Alligator Lounge. I'm probably forgetting a couple, though.... >Of the acts mentioned by Eb as being without label, I don't tend to worry >about many of them as they're largely established.... I still worry.;) Although in some cases, the "demoted" bands may be selling as many records on indie labels as when they were with majors. I distinctly remember once talking to someone at Alias about Archers of Loaf's White Trash Heroes (a band left off my "dropped" list, only because they're split up) and she said this album was selling far better than the previous All the Nations Airports, which had Elektra distribution. I frequently wish I had access to Soundscan numbers (and not only because of this issue). Noting whether the dropped artists' sales took a plunge or not would be a significant piece of the puzzle. I mean, if they can sell just as many records on indie labels (and with a better royalty rate, and less A&R pressure and promotional overhead), great. A successful indie band like, say, Superchunk has absolutely no reason to sign with a major label. But I think they're an exception.... >It's all the new talent I worry about - how will they become established on >the stony soil of the current music industry? Looks like tomorrow's >rock'n'roll visionaries could end up being tomorrow's school caretakers Mmmmm. Yeah, that's a sobering issue. I keep thinking about those poor Wrens, whose last (now out of print!) album Secaucus just *floored* me, and they no longer have a label at all. If this was six or seven years ago, would the more popular Elephant Six bands be on indie labels? Or Air? Eric Matthews? Flowchart? Andrea Parker? The Hang Ups? Komeda? Third Eye Foundation? The Spinanes? Fluid Ounces? (*Oh*, these guys should be on a major label, assuming their personnel changes haven't been too damaging to their creative vision.) Pigeonhed? Nevada Bachelors? Photek? The Ladybug Transistor? Lida Husik? Snow Patrol? Sleater-Kinney? Seems like all these indie bands have potential for some degree of mainstream appeal. But I guess we'll never know. And I'm *sure* there must be other indie bands with such potential which have slipped under my own inadequate radar. Eb ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2000 13:59:52 -0700 From: Eb Subject: RE: moribund (no burgermeister content) MARKEEFE: >Whatever comes around goes around. The music scene now is exactly as it >was 10 years ago. Well, the Internet wasn't a substantial issue 10 years ago, the alternative scene was on a commercial upswing (instead of a downswing), and the majors were a Big Six instead of a Big Four.... >Everyone will soon tire of N'Sync and Brittney, just as >they did New Kids and Debbie Gibson back then. True, but other bubblegum idols will replace N'Sync and Britney. That situation doesn't change much. MRunion: >I'm not really up on what's considered a major label and what >isn't, but Vic's new album "Merriment" was released on the incredibly >small label Backburner, and I have no idea what sort of distribution >this is getting. As far as I know, that indie Backburner album is just sort of a peripheral indulgence, somewhat analogous to Hitchcock releasing Eye during his A&M tenure. And I wish I had a copy! >Is he still signed with Capricorn? As far as I know. >Is Capricorn >considered a major label? Was Texas Hotel? Capricorn is currently distributed by Universal Music -- for the purposes of my musings, I'm lumping major-distributed labels along with strict major labels. Texas Hotel was definitely indie. Oh, so indie. I once went to the *house* where it was based.... >I was under the >impression that Vic's only foree into major-labeldom was the >Capital release of "About To Choke"...and didn't he leave the >label after that one guy quit? Yes, About to Choke was on Capitol. But The Salesman & Bernadette was on Capricorn (then distributed by Mercury), and benefitted from major-label promotion and distribution. > The cool stuff in my house seems to be those >"thrash-oriented" acts like Slipknot. Urgh. Oh man...I haven't heard their album, but I saw them on Conan O'Brien once. Yikes. >I stayed up late (woo-boy!) and wanted to catch 120 >Minutes for old time's sake. It apparently doesn't exist anymore. Is that right? I didn't know it had been discontinued. Eb ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2000 17:12:49 -0400 From: "jbranscombe@compuserve.com" Subject: moribundity and Robyn live First reaction to Eb-list... Gang Of Four are no longer 'active', and Vic Chesnutt is definitely not on a major. At the risk of stating the bleedin' obvious, I'm sure a lot of the artists mentioned who aren't on majors any more are happy with the situation. Pere Ubu certainly, Robyn, TMBG etc. And yup, The Buttholes are now on Hollywood, very strange that...New album due out next year...(I'll believe that when I see it). They had an ugly battle with Touch And Go about their back-catalogue, and recently re-released several of those albums on their own, charmingly titled Latino Buggerveil label. Set-list from final Edinburgh gig. Haven't a)found and/or b)deciphered the other two yet. Dynamic Earth 27/8/00 Mexican God Victorian Squid Raining Twilight Coast Bass (Joined by Tim Keegan) Queen Elvis I Saw Nick Drake Jewels For Sophia No, I Don't Remember Guildford Madonna Of The Wasps Queen Of Eyes Oceanside ENCORE (Solo) Raymond Chandler Evening (Rejoined by Tim) She Said She Said (Which I've never heard him do before) The gig was made for me by the Elvis '69 version of Guilford which he and Tim embarked on. It worked! I was wearing an Elvis T-shirt an' all... jmbc. Stewart or Tony might be able to correct anything I've got wrong. It was good to meet you. Though Stewart, as the son of an Edinburgher I won't even begin to say what I think of Glasgow...:-) ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2000 14:32:30 -0700 From: Eb Subject: Re: moribundity >Vic Chesnutt is definitely not on a major. Are you claiming he's off Capricorn? Or are you just saying he's on an indie label in the *U.K.*? >At the risk of stating the bleedin' obvious, I'm sure a lot of the artists >mentioned who aren't on majors any more are happy with the situation. Pere >Ubu certainly, Robyn, TMBG etc. I really wonder if TMBG's "groundbreaking" gambits of autonomy are going to pay off. Then again, since they haven't released a good album in eight years, maybe they *are* better off playing in the minor leagues.... Eb ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2000 14:55:04 -0700 From: "Tom Clark" Subject: MongoMusic Some buddies of mine are developing an intersting technology that actually matches similar music by analyzing the songs programmatically. Some of the results are fairly interesting! For example: enjoy, - -tc ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2000 18:49:43 -0400 (EDT) From: Christopher Gross Subject: Re: Language question... On Thu, 31 Aug 2000, Jonatan [UNKNOWN] Morén wrote: > I don't think this is the geezer's point. I think he's > getting at..is it called subjunctive in English > grammar? You know, "he asked that everything he touch > (hypothetical case) be turned to gold". Loads of it > in..well, Shakespeare and King James' Bible I guess. > I'm not sure anyone of you is wrong. But hey, I'm > Swedish for chrissakes. Another country heard from! ... Well, that might be what the geezer was getting at, but if so he's still wrong. "Does everything he touches turn to gold?" is not in, and does not require, the subjunctive mood. It's just a yes-or-no factual question about something that either happens or doesn't. The subjunctive mood is for conditional or hypothetical sentences (e.g., "If he were Ralph Nader, everything he touched would turn to gold"). Of course the turning to gold part is a metaphor, but that isn't enough to automatically kick any question involving the metaphor into the subjunctive mood. - --Chris np: Tricky, Pre-Millennium Tension ______________________________________________________________________ Christopher Gross On the Internet, nobody knows I'm a dog. chrisg@gwu.edu ------------------------------ End of fegmaniax-digest V9 #244 *******************************